If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

We are all conservationists. The application of the term exclusively to Trewella and the Seahorse Trust (Membership 1 as far as anyone can ascertain) by Finding Sanctuary is invidious, dishonest and just plain incompetent. We should object on these grounds and have the thing rewritten so that the it reads the boating conservations and the divers with a financial interest.
Otherwise it reads as Conservationists versus everyone else - and of course the conservationists get the Bambi vote.

- We are all conservationists and will object in the strongest terms if we are labelled as anything else. In fact it can be argued that our claim is the greater as at least we are not garotting seahorses with tags or interfering with their habitat and quiet life with cameras and torches at all hours of the day and night.

So from now on we should refer to ourselves as the leisure boating conservationists.

We are all conservationists. The application of the term exclusively to Trewella and the Seahorse Trust (Membership 1 as far as anyone can ascertain) by Finding Sanctuary is invidious, dishonest and just plain incompetent. We should object on these grounds and have the thing rewritten so that the it reads the boating conservations and the divers with a financial interest.
Otherwise it reads as Conservationists versus everyone else - and of course the conservationists get the Bambi vote.

- We are all conservationists and will object in the strongest terms if we are labelled as anything else. In fact it can be argued that our claim is the greater as at least we are not garotting seahorses with tags or interfering with their habitat and quiet life with cameras and torches at all hours of the day and night.

So from now on we should refer to ourselves as the leisure boating conservationists.

Platypus,

well that's put it even stronger than I would have, but you're on the right lines, well said !

1. Yes, if there is evidence of damage measures should be taken to prevent it. But the anchorage has been in use by small boats since the first World War, and has recovered from significant destruction by disease in the 1930s. The anchorage is not significantly more heavily used that it was in the 1970s, yet there is no significant deterioration over th 40 year period.

I suspect that it should read: "The anchorage is now significantly more heavily used that it was in the 1970s, yet there is no significant deterioration over the 40 year period. "

1. Yes, if there is evidence of damage measures should be taken to prevent it. But the anchorage has been in use by small boats since the first World War, and has recovered from significant destruction by disease in the 1930s. The anchorage is not significantly more heavily used that it was in the 1970s, yet there is no significant deterioration over th 40 year period.

I suspect that it should read: "The anchorage is now significantly more heavily used that it was in the 1970s, yet there is no significant deterioration over the 40 year period. "

Oops gone into Back to the future mode there. Dates corrected. Thanks.

The usage of the bay is a vexed question, as no one until the last few years bothered to count boats, and there are no clear answers.

Neil Garrick Maindoment Director of SHT reckons he has known the Bay since the late 1980's, and says there 'has been no significant increase' in that time.

I visited the Bay in the mid 70s regularly and remember seeing 150 + boats. Studlanders have photos from that time which appear to confirm that. I have a photo from around ten years ago showing 200 in the picture on a fine Bank Holiday saturday.

Recent records show the number of vistors are decreasing - due no doubt to the poor summers in recent years, recession, and fuel prices, and this year has shown a marked decline with around 120 at peak holiday times. So the 'not' stands.

EDIT: 1/11. I have toothcombed the summary, and made one or two minor changes and additions, and have also included a brief note about Seahorses, as many reports make them the main issue at Studland.

EDIT: 1/11. I have toothcombed the summary, and made one or two minor changes and additions, and have also included a brief note about Seahorses, as many reports make them the main issue at Studland.

Just another vote of thanks ... I look at the reports (not yours - the others) and the way they're written just sends me to sleep ... just why they have to make it so flipping complex is beyond me ...
I would suggest that is why there is so little "uproar" from the sailing majority who will be affected by all this ...

Just another vote of thanks ... I look at the reports (not yours - the others) and the way they're written just sends me to sleep ... just why they have to make it so flipping complex is beyond me ...
I would suggest that is why there is so little "uproar" from the sailing majority who will be affected by all this ...

The tactic works well... send the opposition to sleep

the art is identifying the two sentences per page that actually SAY aomething!

It's a defence mechanism. Standard Civil Service technique - IIRC even Plain Words admitted that sometimes the purpose of a document is to communicate nothing while appearing to say a lot. (The advice there was to make sure you only do this when you mean to, and not slip into it by mistake!)

Seahorse Tails

Borg, SBPA,Save Studland Bay Group and Community on Facebook etc etc.
Well I am very grateful for all their efforts and had it not been for these individuals our boating freedoms would by now be well on the way to being truly scuppered .
Following this thread ,Borg and the Studland Bay Groups I have had my eyes opened to the modus operndi of conservation groups and persons connected with said industry.
If all else fails and Studland Bay and other vital small craft anchorages become NO ANCHOR ZONES at least these guys and dolls can say they did their best to prevent it.
I never get bored of this subject and support their stand in any way I can when time allows in my busy schedule.

Last edited by ARCO7; 03-11-11 at 12:10.
Reason: Post this was in reply to was removed